Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #69215 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-01-28 08:53 -0500 |
| Last post | 2015-01-30 10:50 -0500 |
| Articles | 15 on this page of 155 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system
Apple's in trouble again Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 08:53 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-28 14:41 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2015-01-28 08:47 -0600
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-28 15:14 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-28 15:18 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Julian Gomez <jeg@polished-pixels.com> - 2015-01-29 00:06 -0800
Re: Apple's in trouble again Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-01-28 10:55 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2015-01-28 11:11 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-28 17:02 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2015-01-28 17:14 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2015-01-28 21:18 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-28 21:34 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-28 15:31 -0600
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-28 21:41 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-28 13:24 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-28 23:10 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2015-01-28 13:23 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-28 13:52 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-28 15:56 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-28 16:01 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-28 14:09 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-28 16:15 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-28 22:01 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-29 18:16 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-29 20:23 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-29 22:18 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-30 00:38 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-30 15:15 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-29 20:36 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-30 04:31 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-29 14:30 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-28 22:25 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-29 10:42 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-29 07:50 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-29 16:11 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-29 16:40 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-29 18:19 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-29 20:25 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2015-01-29 23:37 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-30 10:16 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-30 15:22 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-30 10:28 -0800
Re: Apple's in trouble again "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2015-01-31 19:44 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2015-01-29 18:36 -0800
Re: Apple's in trouble again Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-30 02:42 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2015-01-29 18:32 -0800
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-30 10:14 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-30 08:59 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-30 16:23 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-31 10:37 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-30 15:19 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-31 12:59 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-31 00:15 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-31 07:51 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-31 14:26 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-31 10:51 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-31 16:07 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-31 12:29 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-31 20:22 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-31 18:53 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-02-01 16:31 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-02-01 16:36 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-02-01 19:14 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-02-01 19:26 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-02-01 12:31 -0800
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-02-01 21:48 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-02-01 13:56 -0800
Re: Apple's in trouble again Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-02-01 23:22 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-02-01 20:07 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-02-01 12:31 -0800
Re: Apple's in trouble again nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-01 17:11 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-02-01 22:55 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Savageduck <savageduck1@{removespam}me.com> - 2015-02-01 23:58 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 09:37 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-02-02 11:35 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-02-02 16:53 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-02-02 13:11 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-02-02 18:21 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-02 14:27 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-02-02 17:12 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-02-02 23:14 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-02-03 09:14 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-02 16:12 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2015-02-03 09:36 +1100
Re: Apple's in trouble again Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-02-02 23:12 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-02-02 18:28 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-02-03 13:24 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-02-02 23:56 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-02-02 22:40 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-02-03 17:28 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-02-04 08:32 -0600
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-02-05 09:13 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-02-01 22:28 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-02 14:15 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-02 14:13 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-31 18:51 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-02-01 01:05 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-01 09:43 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-02-01 15:49 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2015-01-31 09:39 +0100
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-31 12:37 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-31 14:25 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-01-31 15:14 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-02-01 10:31 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-30 09:03 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-29 20:31 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-29 10:47 -0600
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-29 15:16 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-29 10:36 -0600
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-29 16:45 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-29 20:35 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-30 09:09 -0600
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-30 16:27 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-01-31 10:31 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-30 16:37 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-30 19:18 -0600
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-31 10:01 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-02-01 10:08 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-31 15:51 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-31 12:20 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-31 12:18 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-31 20:20 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-02-01 10:26 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-31 17:49 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2015-01-31 16:53 -0800
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-02-01 13:56 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-02-01 13:01 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-30 19:17 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Wilbur Eleven <wil@nowhere.at.all.ru.ca.fr.uk.us> - 2015-01-31 08:52 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-31 13:53 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-31 12:26 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Wilbur Eleven <wil@nowhere.at.all.ru.ca.fr.uk.us> - 2015-01-31 15:06 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-31 20:22 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-31 23:35 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Wilbur Eleven <wil@nowhere.at.all.ru.ca.fr.uk.us> - 2015-02-01 09:20 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-31 18:54 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-01-30 19:16 -0600
Re: Apple's in trouble again sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-29 18:17 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-29 22:21 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again sctvguy1 <sctvguy1@invalid.net> - 2015-01-30 00:34 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-30 23:01 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-01-30 22:00 -0700
Re: Apple's in trouble again JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-01-31 12:24 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-01-31 10:02 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-31 14:24 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2015-02-01 10:22 +1300
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-29 19:34 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-30 10:01 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-30 15:28 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-30 11:02 -0500
Re: Apple's in trouble again Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2015-01-28 13:33 -0800
Re: Apple's in trouble again Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2015-01-28 22:41 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-01-28 23:05 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-01-28 23:13 +0000
Re: Apple's in trouble again Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-01-30 10:50 -0500
Page 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-30 23:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54cc5395$0$25079$c3e8da3$92d0a893@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #69330 |
On 15-01-29 17:21, Jolly Roger wrote: > The server market & Microsoft lackies aren't all that important to > Apple. You still haven' made a case for Apple buying either Dell or > Microsoft. Actually, there is a huge case AGAINST Apple buying any competitor: ANTI TRUST Apple is is a pretty good place right now, with market share numbers that do not scare any competition agency in the world, yet it can print money by the boat load (and may have to build bigger harbour in Dublin to receive those boatloads of money :-) In fact, Apple may help Microsoft out in a few years because it would not be in Apple's own interest to see Microsoft disappear and then Apple would come under scrutiny from competition agencies all over the world.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-30 22:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <300120152200105923%michelle@michelle.org> |
| In reply to | #69385 |
In article <54cc5395$0$25079$c3e8da3$92d0a893@news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > The server market & Microsoft lackies aren't all that important to > > Apple. You still haven' made a case for Apple buying either Dell or > > Microsoft. > > > Actually, there is a huge case AGAINST Apple buying any competitor: ANTI > TRUST > > Apple is is a pretty good place right now, with market share numbers > that do not scare any competition agency in the world, yet it can print > money by the boat load (and may have to build bigger harbour in Dublin > to receive those boatloads of money :-) > > > > In fact, Apple may help Microsoft out in a few years because it would > not be in Apple's own interest to see Microsoft disappear and then Apple > would come under scrutiny from competition agencies all over the world. You mean that Apple doesn't have any competition from Google and Samsung?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-31 12:24 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <54cd0fe2$0$44068$c3e8da3$3a1a2348@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #69386 |
On 15-01-31 00:00, Michelle Steiner wrote: > You mean that Apple doesn't have any competition from Google and > Samsung? I mean that Apple is currently in a very comfortable position exactly because there is just enough competition to keep the govt competition watchdoogs at bay. Note that Google and Samsung don't compete in laptop/desktop in a meaningful way. Buying a major PC manufacturer or Microsoft would get the attention of competition watchdogs and cause Apple more trouble than it is worth.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-31 10:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cj3nguF3mgfU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #69385 |
On 2015-01-31, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 15-01-29 17:21, Jolly Roger wrote: > >> The server market & Microsoft lackies aren't all that important to >> Apple. You still haven' made a case for Apple buying either Dell or >> Microsoft. > > > Actually, there is a huge case AGAINST Apple buying any competitor: ANTI > TRUST > > Apple is is a pretty good place right now, with market share numbers > that do not scare any competition agency in the world, yet it can print > money by the boat load (and may have to build bigger harbour in Dublin > to receive those boatloads of money :-) > > > > In fact, Apple may help Microsoft out in a few years because it would > not be in Apple's own interest to see Microsoft disappear and then Apple > would come under scrutiny from competition agencies all over the world. That would be ironic, given that Microsoft helped Apple a few years ago for that very reason. -- Today is Sweetmorn, the 31st day of Chaos in the YOLD 3181 Fancy some more excitement in your life? I'm selling my 300 bhp/tonne Westfield SEiW. Ask me for details.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-31 14:24 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cj46siF7f66U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #69388 |
On 2015-01-31, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: > On 2015-01-31, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: >> On 15-01-29 17:21, Jolly Roger wrote: >> >>> The server market & Microsoft lackies aren't all that important to >>> Apple. You still haven' made a case for Apple buying either Dell or >>> Microsoft. >> >> Actually, there is a huge case AGAINST Apple buying any competitor: ANTI >> TRUST >> >> Apple is is a pretty good place right now, with market share numbers >> that do not scare any competition agency in the world, yet it can print >> money by the boat load (and may have to build bigger harbour in Dublin >> to receive those boatloads of money :-) >> >> In fact, Apple may help Microsoft out in a few years because it would >> not be in Apple's own interest to see Microsoft disappear and then Apple >> would come under scrutiny from competition agencies all over the world. > > That would be ironic, given that Microsoft helped Apple a few years ago for > that very reason. Not quite. As anyone who was around back then knows (including me), in 1997 Microsoft paid Apple as part of a settlement for a lawsuit Apple filed against Microsoft because Microsoft was found to have taken thousands of lines of video acceleration code from Apple's QuickTime in Mac OS and included it in early versions of Windows. As part of the settlement, Microsoft would purchase 150,000 shares of preferred stock, convertible to common shares of Apple stock at a price of $8.25, redeemable after a three year period. By 2001, Microsoft had converted all of its shares into common stock, netting the company approximately 18.1 million shares. By 2003, Microsoft had sold its entire stake in Apple. Microsoft also agreed to pay other substantial balancing payments of a larger undisclosed sum to Apple during the next few years, as reported by then-CFO Fred Anderson. Also, Microsoft and Apple agreed to cross-license all of their existing patents at the time, and any new patents that would become available during the next five years. Apple also agreed to make Internet Explorer the default Mac web browser for the next five years. In turn, Microsoft agreed to continue supporting IE for that term. (At the time, IE was the dominant browser on the market.) -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-02-01 10:22 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <010220151022170413%YourName@YourISP.com> |
| In reply to | #69388 |
In article <cj3nguF3mgfU2@mid.individual.net>, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote: > On 2015-01-31, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > > On 15-01-29 17:21, Jolly Roger wrote: > >> > >> The server market & Microsoft lackies aren't all that important to > >> Apple. You still haven' made a case for Apple buying either Dell or > >> Microsoft. > > > > Actually, there is a huge case AGAINST Apple buying any competitor: ANTI > > TRUST > > > > Apple is is a pretty good place right now, with market share numbers > > that do not scare any competition agency in the world, yet it can print > > money by the boat load (and may have to build bigger harbour in Dublin > > to receive those boatloads of money :-) > > > > > > > > In fact, Apple may help Microsoft out in a few years because it would > > not be in Apple's own interest to see Microsoft disappear and then Apple > > would come under scrutiny from competition agencies all over the world. > > That would be ironic, given that Microsoft helped Apple a few years ago for > that very reason. Those anti-competitive legalities seem to often be quite easy to by-pass. There's a few examples here in New Zealand alone where company buy-outs should never have been allowed under anti-competitive laws, but they still happened. For example, although there are supermarket stores with nearly 10 different brandings, there's really only three parent companies that own them (in at least one shopping mall, a company buy-out cause there to be two supermarkets owned by the same parent company - the same company that also caused years of legal delays trying to stop it's main rival building a new supermarket a fair distance away). There's a similar issue in electronics stores with buy-outs meaning only a couple of parent companies own all the various brands, and again in some cases ended up with two stores near to each other and no store from the competitin parent company. Then of course there's the issue of companies like Dell (and Apple used to do it to) of simply relabelling someone else's product. Car companies that "join forces" to produce two cars which are basically identical, but simply have a different badge on them. As well as companies artifically keeping prices higher than they should be, either through "secret deals" or simply by an acknowledge mutual greed to not go lower. (For example, some parallel importers here claim to have a lower price, but when you look at their prices all they have really done is taken a few dollars off the regular local reseller price ... it's usually still far cheaper to import one youself from overseas.) There may appear to be a wide choice, but the reality is for many products the choice is actualy very limited, and is simply more of a marketing scam than any real "competition".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-29 19:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <T9KdnZd7v5s-TFfJnZ2dnUU7-XmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #69308 |
On 2015.01.29 05:42 , Huge wrote:
> On 2015-01-29, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>> Microsoft has little, if anything, that Apple needs or wants.
>
> Other than lots (and lots and lots and lots) of corporate customers. Apple
> is essentially nowhere in corporates.
You don't become Apple by going what everyone else is whoring after.
--
"Your net worth to the world is usually
determined by what remains after your
bad habits are subtracted from your good ones."
Benjamin Franklin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-30 10:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ZcqdnYB0r_NVAVbJnZ2dnUU7-bmdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #69304 |
On 2015.01.29 00:25 , Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <290120151430580788%YourName@YourISP.com>, Your Name
> <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <1lyynfi.1u0vkagt4enysN%nmassello@yahoo.com>, Neill Massello
>> <nmassello@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> How will they ever recover:
>>>
>>> Maybe they could buy Michael Dell. Two or three times. With cash.
>>
>> They should buy Microsloth ... repoertedly that sunk another 9%
>> yesterday despite their recent announcements of OS X rip-off "Windoze
>> 10" and silly VR goggles.
>
> Why would they want to? This is a serious question, unlike the same
> question I asked about buying Michael Dell, which was a humorous
> question considering the history there.
>
> Microsoft has little, if anything, that Apple needs or wants.
To be taken with a large grain of salt...
Not sure about Apple's "needs" or "wants" however one asset that MS has
that is extremely profitable for them is MS Exchange Server. Apple's
products have been largely compliant with MS Exchange for quite a few
years (at least 5, probably more) so it is not at all a bad match.
You can't ignore the Office suite either (and don't pretend that the
Apple offering is useful to the corporate world). That is a cash cow
but doesn't fit the Apple philosophy of providing usable tools to the
buyers of Apple hardware.
MS also do well in gaming with the XBox platform. There are some
possible synergies with AppleTV and a large Xbox client list.
All that said, I doubt MS is looked at more than cursorily by Apple in
the acquisition sense as Apple have tended to buy slightly under the
radar technology firms (excepting the Beats silliness) to build into the
Apple eco-system rather than acquiring and then molding larger firms.
As to the potential to actually do it...
The premium to take over MS (50% and change) would likely exceed 40%.
This is anathema to Apple.
Today's MC for MS is about $375B so Apple would need to finance to
acquire half of MS as is. Apple has about $200 B in cash on hand (would
require selling short/long term investments). However a lot of that
cash is offshore and would present a nightmare in sorting out the taxes.
To get that 50% (and a hair) they'd need to blow their entire wad, pay
the taxes on some or most of it and finance about $80B more. More
likely, finance even more of that and pay for it out of ongoing cash flow.
Doable but won't happen.
--
"Your net worth to the world is usually
determined by what remains after your
bad habits are subtracted from your good ones."
Benjamin Franklin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-30 15:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cj1m99Fhq52U6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #69358 |
On 2015-01-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote: > > To be taken with a large grain of salt... I'd say an entire salt mine might be needed. > Not sure about Apple's "needs" or "wants" however one asset that MS has > that is extremely profitable for them is MS Exchange Server. Apple's > products have been largely compliant with MS Exchange for quite a few > years (at least 5, probably more) so it is not at all a bad match. Exchange is a heaping pile of shit. No way in hell Apple would have any desire for that. > You can't ignore the Office suite either (and don't pretend that the > Apple offering is useful to the corporate world). That is a cash cow > but doesn't fit the Apple philosophy of providing usable tools to the > buyers of Apple hardware. I don't know, they've been effectively ignoring it all this time and seem to be doing quite well without it. > MS also do well in gaming with the XBox platform. There are some > possible synergies with AppleTV and a large Xbox client list. When did XBOX finally become profitable? 2011? So ten years after release? How much does Microsoft actually make from it now? -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-30 11:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <iqCdne66Mby5NlbJnZ2dnUU7-Y-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #69363 |
On 2015.01.30 10:28 , Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2015-01-30, Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>> To be taken with a large grain of salt...
>
> I'd say an entire salt mine might be needed.
>
>> Not sure about Apple's "needs" or "wants" however one asset that MS has
>> that is extremely profitable for them is MS Exchange Server. Apple's
>> products have been largely compliant with MS Exchange for quite a few
>> years (at least 5, probably more) so it is not at all a bad match.
>
> Exchange is a heaping pile of shit. No way in hell Apple would have any
> desire for that.
It depends if the engineers are looking at it or those wondering what to
do with the heaping pile of money. It isn't that shitty and it has
clients (you know, revenue) galore. Since part of the hypothetical is
how Apple can make more inroads in corporate, Exchange Server would be
quite the kickstart.
However, as mentioned in the prior post, it's usually Apple's habit to
acquire under the radar tech.
>
>> You can't ignore the Office suite either (and don't pretend that the
>> Apple offering is useful to the corporate world). That is a cash cow
>> but doesn't fit the Apple philosophy of providing usable tools to the
>> buyers of Apple hardware.
>
> I don't know, they've been effectively ignoring it all this time and
> seem to be doing quite well without it.
Apple have never ignored MS Office. Recall the 1997 "support" (Office +
investment). Yes, I know Apple didn't need the cash, per se.
Also recall the "intel" announcement. MS were prominent in the Apple
announcement as well.
>
>> MS also do well in gaming with the XBox platform. There are some
>> possible synergies with AppleTV and a large Xbox client list.
>
> When did XBOX finally become profitable? 2011? So ten years after
> release? How much does Microsoft actually make from it now?
Not little. But Sony lead that pack. The value is not the revenue but
the membership.
--
"Your net worth to the world is usually
determined by what remains after your
bad habits are subtracted from your good ones."
Benjamin Franklin
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-28 13:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <baudnSrH6cYByFTJnZ2dnUU7-K-dnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #69215 |
On 1/28/2015 5:53 AM, Warren Oates wrote:
> How will they ever recover:
>
> <http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/27/apple-just-had-the-biggest-quarterly-ea
> rnings-of-any-company-ever/>
>
> <https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2015/01/27Apple-Reports-Record-First-Qu
> arter-Results.html>
Darn. Apple missed two/2 new iPad and iPhone 6 + purchases yesterday
afternoon. :P
--
"Forbear, thou great good husband, little ant." --Richard Lovelace
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.ma.cx (Personal Web Site)
/ /\ /\ \ Ant's Quality Foraged Links: http://aqfl.net
| |o o| |
\ _ / If crediting, then use Ant nickname and AQFL URL/link.
( ) If e-mailing, then axe ANT from its address if needed.
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on this computer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-28 22:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <54c965b1$0$36575$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net> |
| In reply to | #69261 |
In article <baudnSrH6cYByFTJnZ2dnUU7-K-dnZ2d@earthlink.com>, Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> wrote: > >Darn. Apple missed two/2 new iPad and iPhone 6 + purchases yesterday >afternoon. :P Look closely in Apple's April filing and maybe you can spot them. :-) BTW, I think I still have a videotape somewhere of TV coverage of some stock trades I made years ago. I guess I can't prove they were mine, but the correlation happened enough times that I don't think it was coincidence. Patty
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-28 23:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmciqqi.35g.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #69215 |
Okay, so one time? In band camp? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> was all, like: > How will they ever recover: > <http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/27/apple-just-had-the-biggest-quarterly-earnings-of-any-company-ever/> I'm wondering how many companies have ever posted earnings as high for a year as Apple just posted for Q1? I think the answer is: one, Apple. -- http://2blog.kreme.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-28 23:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <cit8ouFcpclU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #69278 |
On 2015-01-28, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: > Okay, so one time? In band camp? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> was all, like: >> How will they ever recover: > >> <http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/27/apple-just-had-the-biggest-quarterly-earnings-of-any-company-ever/> > > I'm wondering how many companies have ever posted earnings as high for a > year as Apple just posted for Q1? I think the answer is: one, Apple. But what the Wall Street speculators and blogo-echo-sphere meat heads really wanna know is how Apple can possibly sustain this business! I mean, most of their income is from a single product! Never mind that the majority of Apple's income has come from single product lines int eh past (Mac, iPod, anyone?). Never mind that they've sustained the business all this time while all the idiots questioned whether they could. Never mind that the business fundamentals are strong. No, no, clearly the question must be repeatedly asked: How can Apple possibly continue operating their business??? -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-30 10:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3aWdnSell-CnNVbJnZ2dnUU7-K2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #69278 |
On 2015.01.28 18:05 , Lewis wrote:
> Okay, so one time? In band camp? Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> was all, like:
>> How will they ever recover:
>
>> <http://techcrunch.com/2015/01/27/apple-just-had-the-biggest-quarterly-earnings-of-any-company-ever/>
>
> I'm wondering how many companies have ever posted earnings as high for a
> year as Apple just posted for Q1? I think the answer is: one, Apple.
==== ==
Apple revenue for the quarter: $74.6 B
Their GM for the quarter: $29.7 B
Their pretax income: $24.4 B
Exxon exceeded that handily in 2013 (last report) though their margins
are much thinner, their revenue is much, much higher. Total assets were
significantly higher too as was shareholder equity (but with the recent
crash in oil prices those will tumble as that's where a lot of their
assets are stored. Mark to market is a bitch.).
--
"Your net worth to the world is usually
determined by what remains after your
bad habits are subtracted from your good ones."
Benjamin Franklin
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]
Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system
csiph-web